This artice needs a complete rewrite. It's totally biased and not funny.

This article has some potential, but, yes, has some kind of edge that I can't put my finger on. It has its moments, but is very confused. Whoever wrote it has a cursory understanding of existentialism, which may be part of the reason that it is poorly done.

It might be more funny if it actually described existentialism at all, but nothing in the article is actually relevant to existentialism.